This study extended validity evidence for measures of coaching efficacy derived from the Coaching Efficacy Scale (CES) by testing the rating scale categorizations suggested in previous research. Previous research provided evidence for the effectiveness of a four-category (4-CAT) structure for high school and collegiate sports coaches; it also suggested that a five-category (5-CAT) structure may be effective for youth sports coaches, because they may be more likely to endorse categories on the lower end of the scale. Coaches of youth sports (N = 492) responded to the CES items with a 5-CAT structure. Across rating scale category effectiveness guidelines, 32 of 34 evidences (94%) provided support for this structure. Data were condensed to a 4-CAT structure by collapsing responses in Category 1 (CAT-1) and Category 2 (CAT-2). Across rating scale category effectiveness guidelines, 25 of 26 evidences (96%) provided support for this structure. Findings provided confirmatory, cross-validation evidence for both the 5-CAT and 4-CAT structures. For empirical, theoretical, and practical reasons, the authors concluded that the 4-CAT structure was preferable to the 5-CAT when CES items are used to measure coaching efficacy. This conclusion is based on the findings of this confirmatory study and the more exploratory findings of Myers, Wolfe, and Feltz (2005). (Contains 7 notes and 4 tables.)